Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that The analogy to fame conflates an epistemic-social concept (reputation among others) with an ontological one (the shining-forth of perfection).
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
All manifestation or 'shining-forth' requires some entity to perceive it; purely unperceived properties seem epistemically indistinguishable from non-existent ones.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The distinction between 'epistemic-social' and 'ontological' assumes these categories cleanly separate, but perfection's expression inherently involves recognition.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
If perfection necessarily reveals itself, the analogy to fame may capture something real: both involve visibility as constitutive, not accidental.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Reputation depends on observers' beliefs and social consensus, while perfection's manifestation exists independently of whether anyone recognizes it.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Conflating these categories misleads us: fame can vanish through forgetfulness, but ontological properties don't change based on collective memory.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
The analogy obscures how divine glory (if perfection shines forth) requires no audience, unlike fame which is necessarily relational.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42